The court held that the existence of urgency is a condition precedent to the exercise of jurisdiction under Section 17 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act and that the failure to comply with the mandatory requirement of publishing public notice of the substance of the notice of acquisition in a convenient place of the locality vitiates the entire acquisition proceeding.

K. C. JAGADEB ROY, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner whose lands have been notified for the purpose of acquisition by the State under Section 4 (1) as well as under sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the "act") has approached this Court for quashing the said two notifications bearing No. 366 KA 322/77 - Puri-R dated 16-5-1977 and No. 39228ka-167/80 - Puri-R dated 23-5-1980 as per Annexure-2 and the notification under Sec. 6 of the Act. This notification pertains to Ac. 1. 000 dec. of land in village Kalarput, Thana - New Capital No. 7, District - Puri and the acquisition was as per the notification for public purpose, namely, the construction of New Capital.

( 2 ) THE land of the petitioner as per the details given in Annexure-1 to the writ petition has been acquired.

( 3 ) MR. R. K. Mohapatra learned counsel for the petitioner urged several points in this writ application. The Government Notification dated 16-5-1977 as per Annexure-2 stating that the lands were needed urgently "for construction of New Capital" in the village Kalarput Thana- New Capital No. 7, District - Puri is vague and did not authorise the State Government to make acquisition of land in question by resorting to sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the Act (as amended by Orissa Act 19 of 1959 ). Though Section 4 of the Act requires the Collector to cause public notice of the substance of the notification of acquisition to be given at a convenient place in the locality, such public notice though mandatory was not given, thereby vitiating the entire land acquisition proceeding under the said notification and the petitioner was deprived from making her objection to the acquisition of the land as required under section 5-A of the Act. That apart the declaration under section 6 of the Act was made at a very belated stage which by itself vitiated the entire land acquisition proceeding. Since the Government has not taken possession of the land in question till now even though the notification of acquisition was made on 2-3-1963 the State did not apply its mind to the urgency of the land acquisition, and as such, the notification under section 17 was not called for and the notification as such be declared illegal, inoperative and liable to be quashed.

( 4 ) THE notification dated 2-3-1963 refers to the plan of land pursuant to which the lands have been acquired as the notification specified that the plan of the land may be inspected in the office of the Collector, Puri. In the case of Aflatoon v. Lt. Governor of Delhi, reported in AIR 1974 SC 2077, the notification stating that an area of 34,870 acres of land was needed for a public purpose such as the planned development of Delhi, was held to be a valid notification and the petitioners were held not to be prejudiced in any manner. In the present case, the party was not prejudiced inasmuch as if she wanted to know the nature of the construction that was needed in the area she could very well refer to the plan which was available for inspection in the office of the Collector, Puri and it is always not possible to give the exact details of the purpose for which the acquisition had been made and we do not think there is vagueness or indefiniteness of the purpose. If an area is required under the plan for the development of the Capital, it would certainly come within the public purpose and therefore the objection of the learned counsel in this respect is rejected.

( 5 ) NEXT, we would like to deal with the last contention, namely, whether the State Government was justified in making acquisition of the land by resorting to sub-section (1) of section 17 obviously is a departure from the normal mode of acquisition, as in that case the appropriate Government is authorised to direct the Collector to take possession of any land needed' for the public purpose on the expiration of the fifteen days from the publication of the notice mentioned in sub-section (1) of section 9 of the Act t